Florida Family Lawyer Blog

In the previous post, we discussed that Florida law allows a party to a divorce proceeding to make a claim for attorney’s fees from the opposing party. More specifically, if one party makes such a request, the court will primarily consider the financial resources of both parties to make an order for one party to pay a reasonable amount to the other party for attorney’s fees, suit money, and costs. Because the relative financial resources of both parties to a divorce proceeding is the principal criterion the court examines in making this determination, I believe it is essential explore the concept of relative financial positions more fully.

Florida courts have repeatedly stated that when looking to the relative financial position of the parties, the first two questions which must be answered are: (1) does one party need attorney’s fees from the opposing party to pursue this divorce?; and (2) does the other party have the ability to pay for the other’s attorney’s fees? To make this determination, the court will require each party make an evidentiary showing of their respective assets and liabilities and make a comparison of each party’s independent financial resources. Recall from the last post that this comparison will not take into account money that a party’s family and friends are willing to share as aid. Also recall that it is not necessary that one party be completely unable to pay attorney’s fees in order for the other party to pay for them; it is only necessary that the party requesting attorney’s fees be in a substantially inferior financial position. A calculation of each party’s independent financial resources takes into account all circumstances and resources, including benefits that significantly enhance one party’s financial position, net income (and income-earning abilities), and the extent of their financial liquidity (like if the party’s assets are readily available).

Imagine a common situation in many states, including Florida. A husband and wife had been married in Fort Lauderdale for 19 years. During their marriage, the husband worked full-time making a great yearly salary while his wife remained unemployed to take care of the family. On their 19th year of marriage, husband and wife decided to get a divorce. That same year, the husband received a $100,000 bonus at work. Realizing the disparity in income between both parties and her inability to afford counsel, the wife requested attorney’s fees from her husband during the dissolution proceeding. In a similar case decided in Florida, the husband was required to pay all of the wife’s attorney’s fees and costs in the dissolution proceeding.

In another scenario, Florida courts have been reluctant to deny attorney’s fees to a requesting party simply because he or she has assets (because those assets are not necessarily readily available). For example, attorney’s fees were awarded to a former wife who was in an inferior financial position to her husband, and who would have to invade her assets to pay attorney’s fees for a dissolution proceeding. Similarly, in another case, a former wife was entitled to attorney’s fees and costs, even when all marital assets were equally distributed and the wife was awarded permanent period alimony. That court awarded the former wife attorney’s fees rather than having her invade her capital assets to pay the litigation costs because it would decrease her income. Furthermore, the husband was in a position to pay for all his fees and her fees combined out of his current income without digging into any of his own assets or investments.

It becomes clear that income-earning abilities appear to be of primary concern when making a financial comparison of the parties when one party requests attorney’s fees from the other party in a divorce proceeding. If you are going through a divorce and are a party that is in a substantially inferior financial position, it would be wise to discuss making a request for attorney’s fees with your attorney.

Posted by Daniel Louis Koch | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Attorney's Fees , Divorce

Bookmark:

Pursuant to Florida statute, the court in a dissolution, child custody, or child support proceeding may order one party to pay a reasonable amount for the other party’s attorney’s fees. Furthermore, these fees may even include a party’s costs to maintain or defend any one of these proceedings, including enforcement or modification of support, custody or visitation. But in Florida, how does the court decide to award attorney’s fees and in what situations is it appropriate?

Awarding attorney’s fees is at the sole discretion of the judge, and in determining whether to award these fees to a party, the judge may consider the earning ability of the parties, the marital assets and liabilities each party obtained through the divorce proceeding, and those assets’ liquidity. It is important to note that in Florida applying for an award of attorney’s fees, suit money, or costs does not require additional support through corroborating expert testimony. Florida courts, through an order of attorney’s fees, ensure that both parties to a dissolution proceeding have the ability to be represented by competent counsel.

Although a judge looks to several factors when considering a motion for attorney’s fees or litigation expenses, the principal issue considered by the judge is the respective financial resources of each party. The primary elements of that issue include the requesting party’s inability to afford an attorney and the other party’s ability to pay for competent legal counsel. In Florida, courts will not order one party to pay the other party’s attorney’s fees in a divorce proceeding when both are on significantly equal footing with regard to their ability to pay their own legal expenses. This calculation does not include financial assistance that may be provided by family members or friends. However, it is not necessary that one spouse be totally unable to pay for legal expenses for the judge to require the other spouse to pay them. Furthermore, the determination of ordering one party to pay for the other’s legal expenses may also be made after the court considers the relative financial status of each party at the conclusion of a dissolution proceeding. Therefore, a spouse may not be entitled to legal fees where the “spouse in need’s” financial position was made equal to the other spouse through the award of alimony and equitable distribution of marital assets. The Florida statute which allows for the award of attorney’s fees in proceedings for dissolution of marriage, support, or child custody also requires the judge to consider other relevant factors in making his or her determination to order this award, including: (1) scope and history of litigation; (2) the proceeding’s duration; (3) each party’s merit in presenting their arguments; and (4) whether the litigation is being used as a means to harass the other party.

Other Considerations: Please keep in mind that there are several other factors the court will not look at in this determination for attorney’s fees. For example, it does not matter if one party prevails in the proceeding or if the party is to blame for the failure of the marriage (i.e., through adultery), the court will not consider these subjective factors in making its determination for attorney’s fees.

Settlement Offers: What if one party wants to settle before the proceeding gets more expensive but the other party, who will demonstrate need for attorney’s fees, wants the proceeding to continue? Well, there is no Florida case law or statute to suggest that a court will deny attorney’s fees in dissolution cases simply because one party failed to accept an offer of settlement, even if a refusal to accept was unreasonable.

Pre-marital contracts: Contract provisions, which are typically found in prenuptial agreements, which waive the right to attorney’s fees and suit money are given consideration by the court, but are not conclusive as to how the court will decide the matter. Therefore, the court considers contractual provisions along with all other pertinent conditions affecting the party’s need and ability to pay. For example, if one spouse had the other spouse sign a prenuptial agreement (a contract) before they got married, and that contract contained a provision stating that neither party would pay the other party’s legal costs in the event of divorce, the court must consider this in making its determination. However, if enforcing this provision would lead to fundamental unfairness, the agreement may not be binding and the court may exercise its discretion to award attorney’s fees.

Please stay tuned for the next post, where we will continue this discussion of awarding for attorney’s fees in dissolution proceedings.

Posted by Bradley H. Trushin | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Attorney's Fees , Divorce

Bookmark:

In this previous post, we discussed Alex “A-Rod” Rodriguez’s pending divorce to his estranged wife, Cynthia, and the effects of a prenuptial agreement on her request for an equitable distribution of the marital assets. And, throughout the summer, the general public was kept riveted as to what would happen next and whether they would be privy to another bitter divorce proceeding involving a celebrity in the Miami courts. But fortunately for the Rodriquez family, the general public will be disappointed. On September 19th, A-Rod and his wife settled the case before any court-room battle could take place. The probable reason: an enforceable prenuptial agreement A-Rod had Cynthia sign before the two got married.

A recent article from the Boston Herald explains that A-Rod and his wife choosing to settle their dissolution proceeding before it ever entered the Miami court system is most likely due to a premarital contract, or prenuptial agreement (the terms of which the public may never know!). In Cynthia’s petition for dissolution of marriage, she argued for an equitable distribution of all the assets, as is Florida law absent an enforceable prenuptial agreement. However, we are sure it is A-Rod’s position as expressed in the prenuptial agreement that Cynthia should not be entitled to half of his income – she wasn’t responsible for his notoriety as a baseball superstar nor did she add to what he already earned before the marriage. This was the precise reason for the prenuptial agreement. As the article rightly hypothesizes, in the divorce settlement reached, most likely guided by the terms of the prenuptial agreement, A-Rod probably gave Cynthia their multimillion dollar home, its contents, a lump sum, and a nontaxable alimony payment of $1.5 million dollars.

While it is all too easy to speculate about the details of A-Rod’s divorce settlement agreement, the one sure thing that is beyond speculation, and more of an absolute, is what the baseball start must pay in child support. Child support obligations simply cannot be contracted away in a prenuptial agreement, and if they are, that portion of the agreement will be unenforceable. The couple’s two children live and attend school in South Florida with Cynthia. In Florida, guidelines as to how much child support a parent is obligated to pay are set forth within the Florida Statutes and is based on a proportional formula dependent on the incomes of both parents and the number of children between them. Because A-Rod makes well over $10 thousand a month, Florida law will require him to pay $2,228.00 a month for the first $10 thousand plus an additional 7.5% of his total yearly income that exceeds $10 thousand. In Florida, if the combined monthly income between both parents of two children is more than $10 thousand, then the courts will take 7.5% of the total yearly income to determine proper child support payment. Therefore, as the Boston Herald article states, if A-Rod makes $25 million, Cynthia will receive approximately $1.875 million in child support, yearly. However, if there is a significant change in A-Rod’s income, whether upward or downward, the award of child support can be modified upon a showing by the petitioning party that there has been a substantial change in circumstances concerning A-Rod’s income warranting a modification in child support and that such a change in child support will not hurt the children.

Posted by Daniel Louis Koch | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Support , Divorce , Prenuptial Agreements

Bookmark:

It’s been six months since you have seen your husband. You want to file for divorce, but you have no idea where he is. What options are available to you when Florida law requires that you serve your husband with divorce papers, even if you can’t find him? The answer is simple: constructive service of process. In Florida, after making diligent and reasonable inquiry into the whereabouts of your husband and you still cannot locate him to serve him in person, you may “constructively” put your husband on notice of the pending suit by following the steps below, so your dissolution may proceed.

If you find yourself in the situation hypothesized above, the first step to take is to make a reasonable search entailing some of the search procedures outlined in this Affidavit of Diligent Search and Inquiry. Next, file an Affidavit of Diligent Search and Inquiry along with your Notice of Action for Dissolution of Marriage. The affidavit, which includes a checklist of places you can look to gather information to locate your husband, ensures that you have made a serious effort to find your husband’s location. Both the affidavit and Notice of Action for Dissolution should be filed in the circuit court in the county where your petition for dissolution of marriage is filed. So, if you petitioned for divorce in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, you would file your affidavit and notice with the circuit court in Broward County. If the court grants you publication of process, the next step would be to publish notice of the dissolution proceeding once a week, for four (4) consecutive weeks, in a newspaper that is published within the county – here it would be a Broward County newspaper such as the Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel. After completing this process, the dissolution may proceed, with or without your husband. However, once the divorce is resolved, other problems may rise when you cannot find the father, such as notifying him of your intent to relocating your child more than 50 miles away from your current address.

Assuming your husband never showed up to the divorce proceeding and the court finds it is in the best interest of the child to do so, you would most likely be awarded full residential custody of your child. If that award granted no visitation rights to the father, your husband, then you would also most likely be able to move more than 50 miles away without telling him because he was not granted visitation rights to begin with.

However, in a different scenario where the father was involved in the divorce and was granted visitation rights with the child, and you decide to move from Fort Lauderdale, Florida to Tampa, Florida, which is more than 50 miles away, you would have to serve your husband with notice of your intent to relocate.

Recently, a visitor to our blog posted a question as to what process should she follow if after the father was initially granted visitation but since that time has taken off and the wife is unable to locate the father. In Florida, there is no specific statute determining what proper notice consists of when dealing with service of a notice to relocate upon the father who can’t be found, but it may be in your best interest to rely on what is the accepted practice for constructive service (service by publication) in family law, like in a petition for dissolution of marriage (see the example mentioned in the previous paragraph). This problem may be avoided if the visitation agreement contains a provision including an address for both the mother and the father, which serves as the official address to provide notice to the other party. By stipulating in advance what is the proper address to provide notice, this problem is solved before it even starts.

If you wish to relocate more than 50 miles away from your current address and your husband does have visitation rights, but you have not seen or been able to locate him after diligent search and inquiry, your best bet would be to consult an attorney to consider your options for possible constructive service.

Posted by Bradley H. Trushin | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Custody , Divorce , Relocation of Child After Divorce

Bookmark:

If you are getting divorced in the state of Florida, the courts follow a rigid guideline in the equitable distribution of all marital property. What does that really mean? Simply put, all assets and liabilities determined to be “marital,” or shared between both husband and wife while married, are assessed and then distributed evenly to both parties after the dissolution proceeding. But this begs the question: What about my non-marital assets, or assets that will not be factored into the court’s equitable distribution analysis? Because Florida distinguishes between marital and non-marital assets, if a wife believes that some piece of property she acquired before marriage should not be considered in the distribution of marital property, it is her obligation to show the court why that asset is a non-marital.

Florida courts generally presume that all assets and liabilities incurred after the exact date you get married are marital for purposes of equitable distribution in a dissolution of marriage proceeding. However, if you are a spouse with the premarital property and feel your husband is not entitled to share in that asset, look to the example mentioned above, you can defeat this presumption by a showing of why the assets and liabilities are non-marital. Because the division of assets and liabilities is one of the major concerns when couples are going through a divorce, it is a great idea to draft a list of all assets and liabilities and label them either marital or non-marital before the dissolution proceeding begins – this could save you a lot of time later on. To help you and the courts decided categorization, the Florida Legislature has enacted a statute that creates a list of assets and liabilities that are considered marital or non-marital.

Martial assets and liabilities include: (1) assets and liabilities incurred during marriage, either individually or both spouses; (2) increased value and appreciation of non-martial assets due to the efforts of either party during the marriage or because marital funds contributed to that increased value; (3) gifts one spouse gives to the other during that marriage; and (4) all vested and non-vested benefits, rights, and funds that came due during the marriage (including retirement, pension, profit-sharing, annuity, deferred compensation, and insurance plans). It is also presumed that all real and personal property held as tenants by the entirety is marital, regardless of whether the property was purchased before or during marriage.

Nonmarital assets and liabilities include the following: (1) assets and liabilities incurred before you got married; (2) assets acquired individually by either spouse by non-interspousal gift, bequest, devise, or descent, or any exchange for these assets; (3) all income received from non-marital assets during the marriage unless that income was used or relied on by the spouses as a marital asset; (4) assets excluded based on a valid written agreement made by the parties (think: pre-nuptial agreement!); and (5) liabilities incurred by one spouse as a result of the other’s forgery or unauthorized signature of that spouse’s name.

In Florida, all assets obtained during marriage will be considered marital until the date the parties enter into a valid separation agreement (that may include a different date to consider) or the date a petition for dissolution of marriage is filed with the court. If you are in the beginning stages of a divorce, consult with an attorney to know what your rights are in regards to your marital and non-marital property.

Posted by Douglas Schapiro | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Divorce , Equitable Distribution

Bookmark:

The awarding of child custody is of prime concern to parents going through divorce. In Florida, the custody of your child is determined by seven simple words: “best interest and welfare of the child.” While it is the parents who initiated the divorce, from the court’s point of view, it is often the rights of the child that dictates child custody determinations. What if you are the parent who is better suited to support the child financially? Does this give you an advantage in obtaining residential custody of the child or children? In Florida, the fact a child would be more financially secure with one parent as opposed to the other parent is not a controlling factor in determining custody rights.

It’s not hard to consider a situation where spouses are going through divorce, they have children, but one parent makes substantially more money than the other. Take, for example a situation where the father is an executive of a corporation with an annual salary in excess of $250,000.00, and the mother is a homemaker who works really hard but does not earn her own income. In an economically driven society, some tend to think that the more money you make, the better you will be able to provide for the best interests and welfare of your children.

The truth is, even though one parent may bring home more money than the other, in most cases, both parents are still able to provide for a child’s reasonable needs. And although money is important in raising a child, especially in recent years, the courts also look to a parent’s ability to provide for a child’s personal, emotional, and social welfare as well as providing for a child’s material welfare.

If you are a parent going through a divorce, but know you make less money than your spouse, there are other important factors to consider in the issue of determining custody. Rather than spending time worrying about your financial situation, spend time detailing the factors the court will consider, such as: (1) character and moral conduct; (2) mental health; (3) the proposed home environment for the child; (4) character of others living in the proposed home of the child; (5) ability to maintain continuity in the child’s home; (6) parent’s work schedule; (7) and the effects, if any, that an interracial marriage may have on the child. And while no single factor alone is indicative of how the court will rule, it’s important to look at all of them and plan accordingly. Together, these factors comprise the analysis by which a court will determine what is in the best interest of the child when deciding the issue of residential custody.

In such cases where there is a significant disparity of income between one parent and the other the court will often mitigate that difference with awards of child support and alimony.

If you need help discussing the custody issues in your divorce, consult an attorney.

Posted by Bradley H. Trushin | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Custody , Divorce

Bookmark:

When Florida residents think about alimony, the most common type that comes to mind is what is termed “permanent alimony.” Permanent alimony, however, is fundamentally different and does not serve the same purpose as “rehabilitative alimony,” which allows a spouse to regain financial independence after divorce. In fact, the court may even grant a combination of both types

Consider this: ten years ago, you graduated from University of Miami, top of your class, and you were well on your way to earning your degree to become a nurse anesthetist. But, before you could finish, you got married and made the decision to put your education and career path on hold to raise a family. You wouldn’t change that decision for the world, but now, it’s ten years later, your marriage has ended, and you have no way to support yourself, having relied on your spouse for generating all of the family’s income. Ignoring your “limitations,” you take control by going back to finish school and enter the work force. In Florida, the court may grant rehabilitative alimony for a limited period of time to assist you in regaining yours status as a self-supporter.

Rehabilitative alimony forces one spouse to pay for the other to obtain a skill, education, or rehabilitation so that he or she can eventually support his or her self – an ability they lost or never had before or during the marriage. If you seek rehabilitative alimony, it is important that during the dissolution proceeding you present detailed evidence demonstrating the cost of completing your education, your prospects of future employment, and the amount of time you will need to obtain the income you need. This “plan,” must be credible and adequate, so it is important to make it as accurate as possible.

In Florida, there is an important limitation on rehabilitative alimony – it does not act as a substitute for unemployment compensation or retirement benefits, but lasts only until the receiving spouse can be sufficiently trained for employment and no longer relies on the other spouse’s funds for support. Take the opening hypothetical, for example. You have presented to the court, during your divorce proceeding, a plan that includes going back to college for two years to earn your nursing degree including an additional year to find the right job that will be well-compensated. Taken together, the court may award rehabilitative alimony for up to 3 years from your ex-spouse.

To discuss the need for rehabilitative alimony during your dissolution proceeding, or to create an adequate rehabilitative alimony plan to present to the court, please consult an attorney.

Posted by Douglas Schapiro | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Alimony , Divorce

Bookmark:

In Florida, the equitable distribution statute mandates that a court must equitably distribute the marital property of parties to a divorce action. This generally means that each party will get half of the marital assets regardless of fault. Furthermore, the parties to this action do not have to specifically plead or request equitable distribution of all marital assets, it is presumed. Therefore, a trial court is required to divide marital assets and liabilities equally between spouses, unless the court makes a finding which supports an unequal distribution. While an equitable distribution presumption is the court’s starting point, Florida provides a list of factors that must be considered to determine if an unequal distribution of property is justified. Interestingly enough, the statute does not list marital fault as a factor to be considered in effecting an equitable distribution.

The factors a Florida court looks at to determine whether marital assets should be equitably distributed include: (1) how much of a contribution each spouse makes to the marriage (which includes care and education of the couple’s kids or work as a homemaker); (2) each party’s economic position; (3) how long the marriage has lasted; (4) whether the educational goals of either spouse has been interrupted; (5) whether one spouse has personally contributed to the other spouse’s career or educational goals; (6) whether one spouse wants to keep assets in their same form without any interference; (7) each spouse’s contribution to acquiring, enhancing, and production of income, as well as the improvement of both the marital and nonmarital assets (8) whether one spouse wants to keep the marital home as a residence for any dependent children; (9) whether either party intentionally dissipated, wasted, depleted, or destroyed marital assets after filing for divorce or two years before filing for divorce; and (10) all other factors needed by the court to determine a fair and equitable distribution.

Martial fault, although unlisted within the Florida statute, may play a part in the distribution of your marital assets. It is not listed within the statute because distribution based on one spouse’s “fault” would essentially reward the innocent spouse and punish the offending spouse. According to the Florida Supreme Court, the purposes of equitable distribution is not to punish a philandering spouse overturning a trial court’s award of 97% of the marital assets to a wife whose husband committed adultery. However, showing evidence that one spouse has cheated on the other is relevant when it demonstrates that the adulterer has depleted marital resources. For example, one spouse using the couple’s marital funds to further his or her adulterous behavior can be used against them in a court’s determination of equitable distribution. A trial court can even assign the depleted funds to the adulterous spouse as part of that spouse’s equitable distribution. See Romano v. Romano, 632 So.2d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). A spouse who wishes to assert this ground must demonstrate the causal connection between the other spouse’s adulterous misconduct and the couple’s financial circumstances. This may prove to be an advantageous loophole for some!

For more information about Florida’s equitable distribution of marital assets, please consult an attorney.

Posted by Daniel Louis Koch | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Divorce , Equitable Distribution

Bookmark:

Christy Brinkley aside, it is no doubt that the rich and famous continuously seek privacy when going through a divorce. In Florida, however, the rich and famous are not the only people who want to seal their court records during a divorce proceeding. Because Florida is subject to “sunshine laws,” all civil court documents are generally made public absent extraordinary circumstances. The Florida Supreme Court has stated that parties seeking dissolution of their marriage are not entitled to a private court proceeding because they are required to use the judicial system. See Barron v. Fla. Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113, 119 (Fla. 1988). However, the Court has carved out some noticeable exceptions.

Not all family law proceedings are made public. Florida, as a matter of public policy, has certainly made specific civil proceedings confidential, such as adoptions, actions to determine paternity, and juvenile proceedings. And while some states, like California, have taken the extra step to limit public access to divorce proceedings, Florida has not taken that stance finding that a presumption of openness must apply to dissolution proceedings in the same way it applies to other civil proceedings. Furthermore, if you find yourself going through a public divorce, even an agreement between you and your soon-to-be ex-spouse to keep the records private cannot overcome this presumption because parties seeking dissolution of marriage are simply not entitled to private proceedings.

I know what you’re thinking – is it impossible to have my divorce proceeding records sealed? Although it may seem that way, the Florida Supreme Court has stated that closure of court records may occur when it is absolutely necessary to comply with well established public policy that has been laid out in the Florida Constitution, statutes, rules, and case law. As it pertains to dissolution proceedings in Florida, sealing such court records have been necessary to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties, oftentimes children, when substantial compelling circumstances have been demonstrated. It is intended that this exception be applied to protect the interest of minor children from offensive testimony and to protect children in a divorce proceeding, in general. The party wishing to seal the records has the burden to demonstrate that closure is needed to protect the child.

If you wish to seal your dissolution records, you have to make a request to the circuit court in the form of a written motion, such as a “Motion to Make Court Records Confidential.” This motion must: (1) identify the exact records you wish to make confidential without revealing the confidential information and (2) explain your basis for making these records private. In Florida, any court record that is subject to this motion will be treated as confidential until a ruling by the court has been made. It should be noted, however, that keeping your public dissolution proceedings private in Florida is an extremely difficult burden to overcome and judges have discretion in their decision to grant confidentiality. If you feel you have a strong reason to seal your records, consult with an attorney to discuss your full options.

Posted by Bradley H. Trushin | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Divorce , Divorce Records

Bookmark:

Does Florida even allow custody and visitation rights for a dog, a cat or other pet? The short answer to that question is no (see Bennett v. Bennett below); family pets are treated as property, which taken together with other marital assets, must be divided equally (Florida is an equitable distribution state). For instance:

It was your fifth year as a married couple, and to your surprise, your husband brought home a puppy named Spot. Over the next several years, both you and your husband walked the dog, fed him, and played with him. In return, Spot provided both of you with love and affection, and even protected you on the mean streets of Miami. In fact, you all grew quite attached to one another. However, you and your husband are now going through a divorce and you have moved to Fort Lauderdale. In addition to asking the Court to divide the marital assets, you also want the court to determine who gets custody of and/or visitation with Spot. Is there any fair way to do this when both of Spot’s owners are going their separate ways?

It was Florida’s landmark decision in Bennett v. Bennett, which held that although “a dog may be considered by many to be a member of the family, under Florida law, animals are considered to be personal property.” 655 So. 2d 109, 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). In that case, the trial court awarded “custody” or the parties’ dog to the husband and gave visitation rights to the wife. After the judgment was rendered, the wife filed a motion for a change in custody, arguing that her ex-husband was interfering with her visitation rights. And although the trial court granted the wife’s motion, effectively giving her visitation with the dog every other month, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal reversed it in Bennett v. Bennett. This decision put a “nail in the coffin” to the idea that a family pet could garner custody and visitation rights (like a child) after its owners’ divorce. In line with this decision, because a dog is personal property, a Court must award possession of the animal pursuant to the dictates of Florida’s equitable distribution statute. The Bennett court reasoned that this is the appropriate outcome because no authority in Florida case or statutory law enables a trial court to grant custody or visitation pertaining to personal property.

It is true that several other states have given family pets a “special status” within divorce proceedings; the Bennett court believed this course was “unwise.” According to the Bennett court, in Florida, the courts are already overwhelmed with pending family law matters involving humans (custody, visitation, child support, etc.), doing so with animals will prove even more burdensome by adding to the already overworked and understaffed court system.

To go back to our hypothetical from the introduction, it would be wise to circumvent the court when establishing custody rights to your pet. To be safe, before the conclusion of your divorce trial, create a written agreement laying out custody of and visitation with Spot. If you leave the matter in the hands of the court, Spot will just be considered another piece of property that needs to be divided.

If you are going through a divorce and are concerned about the custody of your pet, consult an attorney to consider your options.

Update: NBC'sThe Today Show just ran a very interesting story about this topic. If you are interested in learning more, please click here.

Posted by Daniel Louis Koch | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Divorce , Pet Custody

Bookmark:

In a previous post we discussed formulating an agreement between you and your ex-spouse when you want to move your minor child more than 50 miles away after residency has been determined in dissolution of marriage proceeding (your divorce). In that example, we said that the primary residential parent is living in Fort Lauderdale, and she wanted to move with her child to northern Florida. Let’s use that same example. However, instead of formulating an agreement, mom realizes she will never be able to come to a complete, written agreement with her ex-spouse concerning the relocation of her child. Rest assured, there is another avenue at her disposal affording her the opportunity to legally relocate to northern Florida with her child.

In Florida, unless there is a written agreement between the parents concerning the relocation of their minor child, a mother who is entitled to primary residency of this child is permitted to take other steps to ensure her notification to the father is proper. Mom’s first step must be to notify the other parent of the proposed relocation of the child’s principal residence by preparing a Notice of Intent to Relocate. Here is a sample one.. Such notices must conform to the Florida Statutes, therefore, please look to the our sample to ensure proper compliance with Florida laws.

To encourage resolution without court involvement, Florida provides that the mother should first serve the notice upon the former husband. The mother should only file with the court if her ex-husband objects. When first serving it upon the father, her official notice should include a Certificate of Filing Notice of Intent to Relocate, which certifies the date it was served. And finally, absent a pending court action, the mom can serve this notice via certified mail, restricted delivery, with a return receipt requested.

After your notice has been served, the non-residential parent has 30 days to object. If the non-residential parent fails to object within this time-frame, the relocation is permissible. However, if the non-residential parent, the father in this case, does object within the 30 days, he must state the specific reasons to deny the relocation, which must include the amount of involvement he has in the child’s life. It is at this point, the court must get involved. If the father files an objection, the mother now must rely on the court, and she has the burden to initiate court proceedings to obtain the court’s permission to relocate the child.

If you are thinking about relocating your child more than fifty miles away after a dissolution, please contact an attorney to consider all your options.

Posted by Douglas Schapiro | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Custody , Divorce , Relocation of Child After Divorce

Bookmark:

If you watch television, pick up a newspaper, or listen to the radio, you have heard at least one reference to the divorce between Alex “A-Rod” Rodriguez and his estranged wife, Cynthia. As their divorce plays out in the public eye, the real battle is taking place in the Miami-Dade Circuit Courts. Cynthia filed her petition for dissolution of marriage from A-Rod in state court in Miami. She is seeking “equitable distribution” of all assets acquired during the marriage. This sum adds up to around half of the $120 million A-Rod earned during the five and a half years of their marriage. And because Florida is an equitable distribution state, she just may be entitled to half of all assets obtained during the marriage. However, there is one glaring problem – Cynthia signed a prenuptial, or antenuptial, agreement one month before their wedding. If valid, Cynthia may only be entitled to the terms of that agreement, which are still unknown.

This case suggests that Cynthia will probably seek to invalidate the prenuptial agreement in order to get as much money as she can – the same way Ivanna Trump did in her divorce against Donald Trump in 1990. To invalidate this agreement, the Miami court will focus on whether the prenuptial agreement was a valid contract. This includes determining if both parties honestly divulged all of their assets that they brought into the marriage, if both parties entered into the agreement with full knowledge of the terms of the prenup and signed it on their own volition, and if the agreement was signed well in advance of the wedding. The reason to penetrate this agreement is simple. When and if invalidated, Florida allows Cynthia entitlement to half of the marital assets via Florida’s equitable distribution statute, which we can assume is much more than the prenuptial agreement will provide.

Although the court in Miami will ultimately decide the outcome of this case, the public will soon be able to make their own conclusions when and if the documents are made public record. Florida is subject to “sunshine laws,” which means that all court documents should be made public absent extraordinary circumstances. This may be another point of contention in the divorce, as well. The thing to take away from this divorce is this: if you decide to enter into a prenuptial agreement, prenuptial agreements can be invalidated unless they are executed properly.

Posted by Bradley H. Trushin | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Divorce , Prenuptial Agreements

Bookmark: